Peak Oil: how will it end?

Questions to Ponder and Discuss

What differences do you see in the manner in which the webloggers address the issue? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this type of forum on this issue in particular?

Note the British and Canadian publications; do they treat subject matter differently?

Of all the mediums I lay out for you, which is the most critical of America? The most optimistic? Pessimistic? Is this what you’d expect?

Look at Paul Ehrlich’s prophetic article in USA Today. “If the nation had continued its efforts to become energy-efficient, there’d be no need for 400,000 Americans to risk their lives to keep gas-guzzlers running.” He made this statement in 1991. Did he predict the future correctly? Has our government responded in the manner he suggested? He obviously had a good handle on what was happening, do you think he conveyed the seriousness of the situation well enough in his op-ed piece? How could he have done this better?

If you could graph your own ‘Oil Optimism’ curve since the start of the new century based on the material I’ve presented for you in this case, how would it go?

Note how many popular articles about peak oil take the format of relying solely on one expert (someone coming to town for a conference, or someone who has just published a book). While there are risks with this method, we are only given one viewpoint; there are also benefits, in that we get a thorough understanding as to where this one mind is coming from. It is a marked contrast from the ‘interview as many and as diverse sources as possible and put tons of opposing one-liners into your piece’ style of reporting we are more accustomed to in these cases. Do you enjoy this style of sapping all the info out of one expert? What are the benefits? Drawbacks?

What do you think of the content and style in the webloggers? Is this valid journalism? Why do you think this topic generates such a response amongst the weblogging community?

Is there a ‘smoking-gun’ in this case?

Given someone is at fault for this whole situation, who do you think it is? Who do the media seem to think it is? (If no one can be blamed then what is the cause?)

What other events in history do authors relate the ‘end of oil’ to? What would you compare it to?

Many articles try to use the ‘fact’ that we’re running out of oil to make the case for a switch to alternative energies. Others suggest we can continue to burn fossil fuels, but just do it cleaner? Based on today’s science and technology, which path is more reasonable to rely on? Do you see a journalistic bias towards one of these outcomes?

Popular Media

Vidal, John. Global Warning: End of an era: New technologies may see the end of the carbon age that began with the industrial revolution and spread across the globe to the developing world. The Guardian. January 29, 2002.

Heinberg, Richard. Green Anarchism and Oil Depletion; How close is the Collapse? Fifth Estate. Summer 2004.